Inquirer columnist Margaux Salcedo wrote a blind item about a blogger, PR firm, and restaurant a few weeks ago. She coined the term “Big Bad Blogger” because according to her source the blogger and the PR firm were working together to force restaurants to pay for good reviews. Anyway, this article caused a massive uproar causing bloggers, journalists, and even the Internet and Mobile Marketing Association of the Philippines (IMMAP) to issue statements. Today Margaux closes the book on the big bad blogger with her latest article “From the Girl Who Kicked a Hornet’s Nest”. Let me just quote some parts of the article after the screenshot of the entry on Inquirer.net:
To those whose curiosity as to the identity of the “Big Bad Blogger”—be it out of anger or outrage, the desire to condemn, the need to be defensive, or just plain curiosity—has caused them to miss the point, the objective of the exposé was only to reveal the existence of the practice not just of giving a good review for a fee, but posting a bad review to pressure payment out of the subject/s.
The column was also written using anonymous names specifically to protect the source of information (“Georgia”) from the risk of retaliation by the “Big Bad Blogger” and “The (PR) Firm.” Retaliation in this case can be in the form of negative comments on the web—Twitter, Facebook, the blogosphere—and in the form of badmouthing the restaurant to other possible diners.
All three (restaurateur, blogger and PR Firm) had to remain anonymous because a revelation of any one would have compromised the source (it’s a small world wide web) and could invite the dreaded retaliation. As a result, I am paying for this anonymity by taking the blow of negative comments and personal attacks. I can take it because I am confident enough in my integrity and professionalism, and in the basis and merits of the exposé. But the restaurateur source cannot because the negative comments translate into loss of customers and, effectively, loss of revenue and income. Hence the need to respect Georgia’s request.
The anonymity also served the purpose of keeping Big Bad Blogger and The PR Firm from being humiliated and ostracized because their personalities are beside the point. (As was proven by the flood of responses from restaurateurs sharing similar experiences, while the story is specific to Georgia, the practice is not isolated to Big Bad Blogger alone.) Seeing the rage that followed publication of my column, the identification of BBB and The Firm would have, without a doubt, caused them to lose their sources of income as well. The intention of the exposé was only for them—and others who are like-minded—to stop the controversial practice, not to end their means of livelihood.
Read the full article here.
I think this is an “okay” way to resolve the issue because if she did decide to name the BBB and PR Firm I’m sure it would have resulted into nasty lawsuits. If she did more blind items then she would just make things worse. One thing missing though that I would have wanted to see in the article is maybe an apology to all the innocent bloggers and PR Firms who were affected by this issue. Some bloggers were forced to defend themselves because the article sparked a witch hunt.
Time to move on people.
yup an apology to the blogger alluded to the article.
It took a while, but I think the issue was already dying anyway. There are pros and cons to releasing that blind item and I think we all learned a lesson from it.
If this practice exists (which I think it does), it must be put to stop. I go for Margaux on this issue. Freedom of speech and expression covers both bloggers (whether paid or simply writing from the heart) and blind item writers (who wanted to make a statement). The whole system (blogging and the new media front) is, perhaps, self-regulating, if not maturing over time.
Agree, an apology is called for. Lessons learned. We can now put a period on this one.
At best, it will keep everyone on their tipee-toes. And that’s a good thing!
She calls it an industry issue after confirming it with ONE source only and she titles the blogger as big bad blogger when there is no mention of fault of the blogger in the article at all. Not one. And she also goes as far as to mention DCF and MarketMan again as good bloggers, both of whom were feated on TV recently on Jessica Soho, yet she doesn’t mention the 3rd blogger featured who has been the target of all the attacks. Sounds either like an article meant to attack certain people or its just terrible journalism. If the goal was in fact to stop a bad practice going on then it wasn’t written in that way obviously. The controversy happened exactly because of how she wrote it. Her excuse is just an excuse to save face, its easy to read between the lines and see the true meaning behind this bad piece of journalism. What do you call journalists with no credibility?
I see no reason why Margaux should apologize to anyone for what she wrote. I strongly believe her integrity is proof enough she meant well as this practice has got to stop.
This so-called “buzz” marketing is only a euphemism for campaigns that are not grounded on solid public relations principles.
Thus, solicited “buzz” gives not only a bad name to blogging as it also puts the professional and ethical practice of PR in a bad light, blogging being one of the legitimate tools the PR practitioner utilizes to achieve an organization’s communications objectives.
Backed by a credible journalistic reputation, Margaux has only confirmed that online “buzz”, like word-of-mouth advertising, is something one cannot create by soliciting positive reviews. Only ethical communications objectives implemented above-board can deliver positive, spontaneous results.
I thought this was a pretty AWESOME way for Margaux to close the book on this issue though…
if Margaux Salcedo was sincere/honest in her reasons for article, these PR and blogger should not be in business at all. Her source was not even direct was it? From Stephanie Zubiri?
The apology I was looking for was apology for hurting the feelings of the innocent or those alluded to in the article. Not apology for writing the article.
I totally agree with you. I was also waiting for her to say sorry cos pity are those good bloggers “na nadamay lang” on this issue.
time to bury the hatchet, lets go and move on…